columbia wrote:You're complaining about Shero not drafting enough Fs with high picks and then you decry his most recent F #1 pick.That seems odd, to say the least. It sounds like you don't think he is capable of drafting at all.

He could actually be labeled as a poor drafter. His draft success after Staal is 100% based on drafting big names just to trade them later.

Besides Staal which was a great pick and could have gone so many ways (Kessel, Backstrom, Toews) the only prospects he's gotten to the Pros are finally Strait, Bortuzzo, and Jeffrey.

He literally just drafts bigger names. I fully believe 100% he drafted Esposito to trade him months later like he did.

Shero's a great GM though, for his average drafting skills at best, he KILLS it in the trade value.

edit: so I guess you could look back on it and say that he's a great drafter. Because he takes his weakness in drafting and turns it into his strength... but its like you have a gem in Forsberg fall and you don't have any stud winger prospects... I just don't get it.

Wait, does he draft bigger names, or pass on sexy-ranked wing prospects like Teuvo and Forsberg? Pick one, I'm confused

Also, good to see you've already seen enough of Pouliot and Forsberg to know what kind of players they'll turn into. Talk about herp derp.

Also, remember when the Pens drafted Another Damn Defenseman We Don't Need in Morrow and passed on Crosby's awesome sniping wing Ray Ferraro's son, and everybody was pissed? I'm still pissed! I assume that dude scored like a billion points with Datsyuk.

NeddieVedder wrote:Why doesn't the draft just follow the prospect rankings in order?

Also, remember when the Pens drafted Another Damn Defenseman We Don't Need in Morrow and passed on Crosby's awesome sniping wing Ray Ferraro's son, and everybody was pissed? I'm still pissed! I assume that dude scored like a billion points with Datsyuk.

mikey287 wrote:Every year, we draft dollar bills in the hopes of them turning into $100 bills. We see Derrick Pouliot as a guy that could turn into a 20, maybe a 10...at that same spot, we see a forward that could turn into a 10...maybe a 10 and a 5...maybe just a 5...it just doesn't matter what position they play, I'd rather have the 20 and either use it or buy something with it later...no reason to short change yourself purposefully...

The point is, they aren't drafting "a forward who can play...years earlier" because they didn't feel one was available at the spots we drafted. It's not like it's a secret that we need forwards in the organization, they're aware. A lot of organizations do this. BPA is the way to go almost universally.

I think also people have "plan" and "strategy" mixed up with "we're drafting the BPA because that's what you do" ...I don't think Shero is sitting in his office going 'that's right, all the defensemen! ha ha ha ha!" thinking that he'll one day get a monopoly. It's not like we're going out of our way to draft d-men (the Isles used all 7 of their picks on d-men in this past draft)...we're just taking who we feel is good and going to be good...and if they happen to be a defenseman four times in a row or whatever, then fine, now we have a strength. Top pairing d-men are harder to find than top line forwards, top-4 d-men are harder to find than top-6 forwards...

I'm not at all concerned.

Or you just draft the 10 dollar bill in Forsberg and with Crosby in a year or so he's worth 100...

Seriously it gets to a point where 6 nhl caliber prospect defenseman is just complete over kill. Why not draft forwards and develop them into the system instead of going for trade. Bennett will be a bust, kid just looks like glass. He won't make it. I honestly hope they trade him in some package asap.

How much have you seen forsberg play? #1 ranked euro was passed on by 10 teams. Either they've all seen something they didn't like or liked someone better... or you, who most likely has never seen a game he's played, is correct and they are all retards.

I dont know who will be better... but to claim forsberg is a 10, while everyone else in the draft is a 1 while you've probably never seen more than a youtube highlight and the stupid ISS ranking is asinine.

NeddieVedder wrote:Why doesn't the draft just follow the prospect rankings in order?

Also, remember when the Pens drafted Another Damn Defenseman We Don't Need in Morrow and passed on Crosby's awesome sniping wing Ray Ferraro's son, and everybody was pissed? I'm still pissed! I assume that dude scored like a billion points with Datsyuk.

mikey287 wrote:Every year, we draft dollar bills in the hopes of them turning into $100 bills. We see Derrick Pouliot as a guy that could turn into a 20, maybe a 10...at that same spot, we see a forward that could turn into a 10...maybe a 10 and a 5...maybe just a 5...it just doesn't matter what position they play, I'd rather have the 20 and either use it or buy something with it later...no reason to short change yourself purposefully...

The point is, they aren't drafting "a forward who can play...years earlier" because they didn't feel one was available at the spots we drafted. It's not like it's a secret that we need forwards in the organization, they're aware. A lot of organizations do this. BPA is the way to go almost universally.

I think also people have "plan" and "strategy" mixed up with "we're drafting the BPA because that's what you do" ...I don't think Shero is sitting in his office going 'that's right, all the defensemen! ha ha ha ha!" thinking that he'll one day get a monopoly. It's not like we're going out of our way to draft d-men (the Isles used all 7 of their picks on d-men in this past draft)...we're just taking who we feel is good and going to be good...and if they happen to be a defenseman four times in a row or whatever, then fine, now we have a strength. Top pairing d-men are harder to find than top line forwards, top-4 d-men are harder to find than top-6 forwards...

I'm not at all concerned.

Or you just draft the 10 dollar bill in Forsberg and with Crosby in a year or so he's worth 100...

Seriously it gets to a point where 6 nhl caliber prospect defenseman is just complete over kill. Why not draft forwards and develop them into the system instead of going for trade. Bennett will be a bust, kid just looks like glass. He won't make it. I honestly hope they trade him in some package asap.

To the first point, no. Because if it were that easy, I'd rather just sign a forward like that...so since it's so easy, why not invest a top-10 pick in a d-man since we don't have a player that can magically turn them into a $100 bill.

It's not complete overkill or overkill at all. Why draft players that the staff feels to be inferior? You would knowingly draft an inferior player with a top-10 pick? Doesn't sound too reasonable...

People make it sound like we're holding d-men back or something, like there's too many...but it still hasn't become an issue yet...it's not like we're drafting these guys in the first round and losing them on waivers because we can't fit them...they're either playing for us, developing or being transformed into finished products (Kunitz, Neal)...not sure why this is such a panic attack. Again, no one feels that Forsberg was a good fit for us because "_______" or he would be perfect for Crosby because "_______" or he won't be a bust at all because "_______" it's just "durrr, he was a forward, we need have forward...we have a limitless sky of defensemen...must force pick..."

Ignored is getting a player that was considered a first rounder in the 4th round with Matia Marcantuoni...that's how you can tell it's total bull...Marcantuoni is a first round talent that had some health concerns...Forsberg/Teravainen aren't future stars...so we ended up getting the best of both worlds but because some arbitrary ranking came out and told you that "Forsberg should go here...and Teravainen, now, he should go over here...and this guy, well, he's this..." it's outrage. When really, you got the forward that you would have gotten at 22 anyhow in Marcantuoni AND you got two potential top-4 d-men...I mean, are we thinking here, or are we just mad...?

Not to say Shero is infallible, far from it. But what is being discussed hasn't caused a problem to date, nor does it appear to be a problem in the future...so I guess I'm confused as to what the issue is...

NeddieVedder wrote:Why doesn't the draft just follow the prospect rankings in order?

Also, remember when the Pens drafted Another Damn Defenseman We Don't Need in Morrow and passed on Crosby's awesome sniping wing Ray Ferraro's son, and everybody was pissed? I'm still pissed! I assume that dude scored like a billion points with Datsyuk.

Excellent find. Some of the same experts who were upset with the Despres pick, now project him in the Pens top four. Ferraro's kid had 9 goals in 56 AHL games last year. Goes to prove that drafting, especially so late in the first round, is far from an exact science.

NeddieVedder wrote:Why doesn't the draft just follow the prospect rankings in order?

Also, remember when the Pens drafted Another Damn Defenseman We Don't Need in Morrow and passed on Crosby's awesome sniping wing Ray Ferraro's son, and everybody was pissed? I'm still pissed! I assume that dude scored like a billion points with Datsyuk.

Excellent find. Some of the same experts who were upset with the Despres pick, now project him in the Pens top four. Ferraro's kid had 9 goals in 56 AHL games last year. Goes to prove that drafting, especially so late in the first round, is far from an exact science.

To be clear though. I am not complaining about one specific pick over another. My main point was that we trade Staal and use 2 first round draft picks to add d-men to our already deep d-men prospect pool. And we literally have zero forward prospects. And the discussion (at least with me) started because everyone was telling me how smart this was as Shero's strategy because d-men are sought after and you can flip them for forwards.

And kept sighting the Kunitz and Neal trades. My problem with those beyond the fact they took 7 years as Pens to make as trades, is that we traded a top 5 pick and got Kunitz and you cant count on a team giving you a James Neal (or a 25 goal scorer turning into a 40 goal scorer wtih Malkin) every time.

See with Whitney everyone talks how "we won" the trade, but I think it proves as well that not all picks develop like you think (of course) and that works for D and F so hoping a d-man develops enough to trade for a bit over value in 7 years is crazier to me than just drafting a forward who you hope develops.

Now some people are sighting we always take the BPA and that just happened to be d. - different argument and I dont have as much of a problem if that is what we are exactly doing, still would have liked a forward with our pull of 3 this year if that is the case but I am not as puzzled.

BurghersAndDogsSports wrote:See with Whitney everyone talks how "we won" the trade, but I think it proves as well that not all picks develop like you think (of course) and that works for D and F so hoping a d-man develops enough to trade for a bit over value in 7 years is crazier to me than just drafting a forward who you hope develops.

Now some people are sighting we always take the BPA and that just happened to be d. - different argument and I dont have as much of a problem if that is what we are exactly doing, still would have liked a forward with our pull of 3 this year if that is the case but I am not as puzzled.

If Whitney's foot issues were ever resolved, his style and passing on that Oilers team MIGHT make you consider otherwise with respect to who won that trade. The amount of offensive firepower that team has, it needs Dmen like Whitney to give them the puck. Whitney backdoor.... he SCORES!!!!!! wow, the oldschool Sid - Whitney play.

I really think Shero will trade a D prospect for a winger, but the timing has to be right. The Pens are setup with the assets, so when a team suffers injuries, or just collapses and gets blown up, Shero will strike.

columbia wrote:You're complaining about Shero not drafting enough Fs with high picks and then you decry his most recent F #1 pick.That seems odd, to say the least. It sounds like you don't think he is capable of drafting at all.

He could actually be labeled as a poor drafter. His draft success after Staal is 100% based on drafting big names just to trade them later.

Besides Staal which was a great pick and could have gone so many ways (Kessel, Backstrom, Toews) the only prospects he's gotten to the Pros are finally Strait, Bortuzzo, and Jeffrey.

He literally just drafts bigger names. I fully believe 100% he drafted Esposito to trade him months later like he did.

Shero's a great GM though, for his average drafting skills at best, he KILLS it in the trade value.

edit: so I guess you could look back on it and say that he's a great drafter. Because he takes his weakness in drafting and turns it into his strength... but its like you have a gem in Forsberg fall and you don't have any stud winger prospects... I just don't get it.

Wait, does he draft bigger names, or pass on sexy-ranked wing prospects like Teuvo and Forsberg? Pick one, I'm confused

Also, good to see you've already seen enough of Pouliot and Forsberg to know what kind of players they'll turn into. Talk about herp derp.

If Shero and his staff viewed Forsberg as a gem, than they would've drafted him. It's obvious they didn't feel that way. I would've drafted Forsberg before Pouliot as well...but I'm also not an NHL GM and only dabble VERY LIGHTLY into amateur scouting.

mikey287 wrote:To the first point, no. Because if it were that easy, I'd rather just sign a forward like that...so since it's so easy, why not invest a top-10 pick in a d-man since we don't have a player that can magically turn them into a $100 bill.

It's not complete overkill or overkill at all. Why draft players that the staff feels to be inferior? You would knowingly draft an inferior player with a top-10 pick? Doesn't sound too reasonable...

People make it sound like we're holding d-men back or something, like there's too many...but it still hasn't become an issue yet...it's not like we're drafting these guys in the first round and losing them on waivers because we can't fit them...they're either playing for us, developing or being transformed into finished products (Kunitz, Neal)...not sure why this is such a panic attack. Again, no one feels that Forsberg was a good fit for us because "_______" or he would be perfect for Crosby because "_______" or he won't be a bust at all because "_______" it's just "durrr, he was a forward, we need have forward...we have a limitless sky of defensemen...must force pick..."

Ignored is getting a player that was considered a first rounder in the 4th round with Matia Marcantuoni...that's how you can tell it's total bull...Marcantuoni is a first round talent that had some health concerns...Forsberg/Teravainen aren't future stars...so we ended up getting the best of both worlds but because some arbitrary ranking came out and told you that "Forsberg should go here...and Teravainen, now, he should go over here...and this guy, well, he's this..." it's outrage. When really, you got the forward that you would have gotten at 22 anyhow in Marcantuoni AND you got two potential top-4 d-men...I mean, are we thinking here, or are we just mad...?

Not to say Shero is infallible, far from it. But what is being discussed hasn't caused a problem to date, nor does it appear to be a problem in the future...so I guess I'm confused as to what the issue is...

Your post calmed me down about Forsberg/defense prospects.

We have too many defensive prospects going forward that if we wait to see if they all develop, some won't, and you'll lose your value. Have to trade a few of them in the next 12 months in my opinion. Pouliot as a number 3? Where's Morrow going to be in the future? We all agree Morrow is better than Pouliot correct?

However raised concerns about Marcantuoni... the way you made him sound, 4th round selection, makes it sound like how it was when we drafted Caputi. Same thing, 1st round talent based on his accomplishments in the OHL. I think he was 3rd in scoring his last year in the OHL.

columbia wrote:You're complaining about Shero not drafting enough Fs with high picks and then you decry his most recent F #1 pick.That seems odd, to say the least. It sounds like you don't think he is capable of drafting at all.

He could actually be labeled as a poor drafter. His draft success after Staal is 100% based on drafting big names just to trade them later.

Besides Staal which was a great pick and could have gone so many ways (Kessel, Backstrom, Toews) the only prospects he's gotten to the Pros are finally Strait, Bortuzzo, and Jeffrey.

He literally just drafts bigger names. I fully believe 100% he drafted Esposito to trade him months later like he did.

Shero's a great GM though, for his average drafting skills at best, he KILLS it in the trade value.

edit: so I guess you could look back on it and say that he's a great drafter. Because he takes his weakness in drafting and turns it into his strength... but its like you have a gem in Forsberg fall and you don't have any stud winger prospects... I just don't get it.

Wait, does he draft bigger names, or pass on sexy-ranked wing prospects like Teuvo and Forsberg? Pick one, I'm confused

Also, good to see you've already seen enough of Pouliot and Forsberg to know what kind of players they'll turn into. Talk about herp derp.

Win

lol washington dc, auto lose. Why not contribute to the thread instead? Gotta give you props though, should be nice for you to get a nice view of Forsberg dropping 30 on Backstroms wing when we have a weaker Goligoski who won't even make the pros.

mikey287 wrote:To the first point, no. Because if it were that easy, I'd rather just sign a forward like that...so since it's so easy, why not invest a top-10 pick in a d-man since we don't have a player that can magically turn them into a $100 bill.

It's not complete overkill or overkill at all. Why draft players that the staff feels to be inferior? You would knowingly draft an inferior player with a top-10 pick? Doesn't sound too reasonable...

People make it sound like we're holding d-men back or something, like there's too many...but it still hasn't become an issue yet...it's not like we're drafting these guys in the first round and losing them on waivers because we can't fit them...they're either playing for us, developing or being transformed into finished products (Kunitz, Neal)...not sure why this is such a panic attack. Again, no one feels that Forsberg was a good fit for us because "_______" or he would be perfect for Crosby because "_______" or he won't be a bust at all because "_______" it's just "durrr, he was a forward, we need have forward...we have a limitless sky of defensemen...must force pick..."

Ignored is getting a player that was considered a first rounder in the 4th round with Matia Marcantuoni...that's how you can tell it's total bull...Marcantuoni is a first round talent that had some health concerns...Forsberg/Teravainen aren't future stars...so we ended up getting the best of both worlds but because some arbitrary ranking came out and told you that "Forsberg should go here...and Teravainen, now, he should go over here...and this guy, well, he's this..." it's outrage. When really, you got the forward that you would have gotten at 22 anyhow in Marcantuoni AND you got two potential top-4 d-men...I mean, are we thinking here, or are we just mad...?

Not to say Shero is infallible, far from it. But what is being discussed hasn't caused a problem to date, nor does it appear to be a problem in the future...so I guess I'm confused as to what the issue is...

Your post calmed me down about Forsberg/defense prospects.

We have too many defensive prospects going forward that if we wait to see if they all develop, some won't, and you'll lose your value. Have to trade a few of them in the next 12 months in my opinion. Pouliot as a number 3? Where's Morrow going to be in the future? We all agree Morrow is better than Pouliot correct?

However raised concerns about Marcantuoni... the way you made him sound, 4th round selection, makes it sound like how it was when we drafted Caputi. Same thing, 1st round talent based on his accomplishments in the OHL. I think he was 3rd in scoring his last year in the OHL.

- There's really no such thing as too many defensive prospects.

- They all aren't a lock to pan out, but trading them before they do doesn't maximize value either. If you find a team that goes "alright, Ray, gotta have Harrington now" then you got something, but we don't have any major problems with losing players now, or a logjam of any sort...the worst thing that could happen is we expose a couple of the scrubs like Lovejoy or Strait to waivers (which is always so scary to fans for some reason, but every team in the league puts a guy like Strait or Nick Johnson or whatever on waivers every October 1)...it's not like Morrow is gonna end up on waivers any time soon or anything...my GMing philosophy would have me as an asset manager (make sure I can something for what I have when I'm not using it, basically), but as I matured and realized how things work a little better, you realize that you could use all 50 of your allotted contracts on Lovejoy's and Strait's if you wanted to...there's a billion of them. If we tied them to each other, boxed them and shipped them to Abu Dhabi I wouldn't be the least bit concerned so long as it was C.O.D...I mean, they aren't terrible, and I hope Strait becomes awesome or Lovejoy for that matter, and becomes a top-tier third pairing guy for us this year...but in the grand scheme, exposing a player like this/these to waivers isn't a big deal...

- I would never put a time limit on trading a prospect. That's no different than "force picking" a forward because we felt the need to "force pick" a kid we don't believe can play...if the right deal comes along and it makes sense for both teams, then sure...but I'm not sending an e-mail to the other 29 GMs going "gotta trade Harrington, Pouliot or Despres in the next 12 months/days/minutes" - doesn't make sense. You have no idea what the landscape will look like in 12 months, 24 months, etc. why put an arbitrary time limit on something that doesn't need it...and doesn't need it at all...

- It was just a hypothetical...Pouliot could be a #3, Morrow could be a #2...they could both bust...Pouliot could be a #2, Morrow a #5...Pouliot could get hurt the next three years and not even get qualified after his ELC...Morrow could win a Norris in three years...who knows...let's just give them the best chance to succeed in this organization and see what happens...no sense trying to map out every nook of it...

- Marcantuoni is not on the same level as Caputi. Caputi wasn't ever considered as good as Marcantuoni, not even close...we still got what everyone wanted (or seemingly must have right now, a forward developing in the system) plus what the organization really wanted which was Pouliot and apparently Maatta (I have no idea what the Pens thought of Maatta, but I know they absolutely adored Pouliot)...so I fail to see the concerns, bells, buzzers, time limits, trade concerns and all that noise...

Mikey - thanks for all of the info. I don't understand at all (from others) how it can be a problem to have too many defensive prospects...I'm really looking forward to watching these guys develop, to see how they pan out. I'll definately be paying more attention than I have in the past, with our prospects...

Anyway, my only concern would be if too many of these guys ended up in the same place at the same time - say Wilkes-Barre, where you'd have trouble carving up ice time in key situations for all of them. I haven't looked into this, but I'm assuming that's not an issue now, since they will be spread out in juniors, college etc. Do you see this as an issue at all?

Note: Players on entry-level contracts may be sent to the ECHL without permission. So, off hand that effects Samuelsson or McNeill perhaps...Morrow and Dumoulin are too good for that league already...so if we get into a spot where we have an extra spot, just send McNeill down...

If not, so next year...Letang-OrpikNiskanen/Martin-DespresOne of those scrubs*? or Morrow or Niskanen-DumoulinExtra: one of the scrubs maybe two

* - Scrubs in this case are an unnecessarily disrespectful way to refer to Engelland, Lovejoy, Bortuzzo, Strait and Sneep...

AHL:One of Morrow or Dumoulin probably won't make the team because I assume Martin will still be here...HarringtonSamuelssonMcNeillD'AgostinoAHL vet or two

The rest:Maatta will remain in juniors again...Velischek won't be offered a contract, neither will Ruopp...We'll let Grant/Sneep and those other guys battle it out for a contract but let the rest go...maybe someone like Sneep will stick and be one of our AHL vet guys...

And then in 2014:I think McNeill is done by then, he won't be qualified...Maatta slides in, Seymour won't be given an entry-level contract...by then another spot will open up in the NHL...our 2013 draftees aren't eligible yet...and the cycle continues...

I didn't take into consideration us adding anyone significant, which isn't really realistic, but we have room to give IMO...look at Philadelphia for instance, I think they have like 20 d-men under contract, look at it:

Those combos you are projecting for the next 2 seasons are scary. Who is our "shutdown" pairing? Who is killing penalties? It reminds me of our playoff lineup of 09/10 - bunch of fancy skating, hybrid d-men with little collective defensive abilities. I'm sure their first pass will be great, but what happens when the other team connects their first pass? The laydown city Pens.